I don't like Andrew Wiggins because I think he's the second coming of an even worse Rudy Gay. Even if that may be the case, he has some appeal to me for several reasons:

1.) He still is only 22 years old. That means there may be still be some hope he can be better than a 13.8 PER with all his physical prowess and skill. He's also developing a reputation as being something of an iron horse having missed only one game, during his 3.5 season career. We need that kind or stability moving forward.

2.) The Wolves have a horrible track record for developing players. Maybe a change of scenery and personnel might help Wiggins realize his emmense potential.

3.) Talented swingmen are incredibly hardly to find, especially at the 3-spot. Wiggins' profile and skill is exactly what you want in that respect and it's rarity offers some added value.

4.) His impending raise might allow us to offload some smaller, albeit unsavory contracts in the process. The idea would be to have a higher percentage of our money tied up in productive player with the "potential tag". Which brings me to my trade proposal...

Would Tim Hardaway Jr., Joakim Noah, our first round pick, and cash for Andrew Wiggins, Cole Aldrich ($7 million expirer) and their first round pick work?

Incentives for the Wolves: 1.) Tim Hardaway Jr. offers better production than Wiggins in the immediate. 2.) The pick swap between both teams is suppose to account for the "potential" difference in both players, as well as the cost of unloading Noah.

BigDaddyG wrote:Wiggins seems destined to be a good stats bad team player. I'd be too afraid too invest the cap space and assets.

Is there a 3rd team we can send him to and recoup cap flexibility as well as a comparable first round pick? As I said before, I really don't like Wiggins; I'm just trying to figure out how to make Noah's $17 million/yr productive. At least Wiggins fits a need and could get better.

Are there any other teams out there that could use Wiggins though? I wonder what they'd be willing to give up if the conversation because a three-team deal.

Cartman718 wrote:the problem with wiggins is that he takes nights off...at this stage in the league i am not sure why he would do that. that too with jimmy butler and towns with him

I think effort is one of a host of issues that ails Wiggins. The only redeeming qualities about him are his youth, durability and athleticism. But all those things are not enough to merit a max contract in a league as talented as this one. Would you be content with converting the $17 million/yr owed to Noah into a productive player (Wiggins)? I think it'd Wiggins at $30 million per is still a better alternative than having Noah, as dead salary at his pricetag and Hardaway Jr. Worst case scenario, if Wiggins doesn't work out as well as we hope, he can always be moved again.

After all, Blake Griffin just got traded on that awful contract, so why couldn't Wiggins? His stats should still marginally improve and with certain franchises struggling for "star" power, I think he'll always have an appeal in spite of the cost.

I briefly thought out loud about removing the first draft pick swap in the deal but doubt the Wolves would be incentivized enough to do it otherwise. But what about if the Knicks structured the incentives to be more financial? Would that be enough of an appeal to the Wolves to compensate the "potential"-factor that comes with Wiggins?

Wiggins would be owed so much annual salary this summer that the Wolves could probably throw Gorgui Dieng's contract into the deal and not have to take much if anything back salary-wise. That'd save them about $15 million per season, which would go a long way to having them retain both Butler and Towns without having to pay the luxury tax. Would we want to squander whatever cap space we might have this summer and beyond, to get rid of Noah and get a player like Wiggins that will likely never realize his potential?

So even if we were able to offload Noah in the process (and took back more salary instead), that wouldn't be enough?

As I said before, I don't like Wiggins and I'm skeptical of his future growth. But he is "better" than anything we currently have at the 3-spot and I think there is a far higher probability of unloading Wiggins at $30M/yr than Noah at $18M/yr, should things go south.

Just out of curiosity, do you think Wiggins' play will ever match the hype he had coming out of the draft? I'm skeptical he ever will but was wondering what the numbers are telling you.

BigRedDog wrote:Another ridiculous trade proposal. Wolves wouldn't do that trade without Noah in it and you want to include Noah??? Give me a break.

What is Wiggins good at?

Taking low quality shots?

Exactly. It is startling how little he does beyond being a volume scorer but do you think he will ever develop the other facets of his game? Can he be fixed and is there any precedent to a player with his profile doing so?

So even if we were able to offload Noah in the process (and took back more salary instead), that wouldn't be enough?

As I said before, I don't like Wiggins and I'm skeptical of his future growth. But he is "better" than anything we currently have at the 3-spot and I think there is a far higher probability of unloading Wiggins at $30M/yr than Noah at $18M/yr, should things go south.

Just out of curiosity, do you think Wiggins' play will ever match the hype he had coming out of the draft? I'm skeptical he ever will but was wondering what the numbers are telling you.

Wiggins is young, but I think people overrate age. If a guy has been doing the same thing for every year, the most reasonable thing is to expect he will continue to. Offloading Noah would be quite nice. You also have us trading down though. The main problem is that I just don't want our offense to have 15 to 20 shots a game taken by Wiggins under any circumstances.

BigRedDog wrote:Another ridiculous trade proposal. Wolves wouldn't do that trade without Noah in it and you want to include Noah??? Give me a break.

What is Wiggins good at?

Taking low quality shots?

Exactly. It is startling how little he does beyond being a volume scorer but do you think he will ever develop the other facets of his game? Can he be fixed and is there any precedent to a player with his profile doing so?

I think people could forgive the inefficient offense, if he played adequate defense. He has Butler to take on the tough assignments and he still sucks. The offense could improve with right coach, but he'll never live up to the hype.

Always... always remember: Less is less. More is more. More is better and twice as much is good too. Not enough is bad, and too much is never enough except when it's just about right.
- The Tick